Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
[...]
> (I believe that I saw it asserted here earlier that, even as of this late
> date, there is no general agreement, within this group or within the
> RIPE membership as a whole as to what things might or do constitute
> "abuse of the Internet". If that is correct, then offhand I would have
> to say that arriving at some common understanding of that term could be,
> would be, and should be the first order of business for this group, above
> all else. I mean what's the point of having an "anti abuse" group if
> nobody even knows for sure what "abuse" is?)
I think you just made the case for dissolving the AAWG, :-)
under *your* assumption that the Community on the Internet will be able to come
up with a *unified definition* and *central management* of "abuse of the Internet".
Wilfried.